paloma abad lÓpez, emilio; sÁnchez, alejandra; …...september17 conferenceinspire 2017 9-the...

1Conference inspire 2017September 17

Paloma AbadLÓPEZ, Emilio; SÁNCHEZ, Alejandra;

RODRÍGUEZ, Antonio F; SOTERES, Carolina


We know…◦ Directive 2007/2/EC requires Member States to monitor the implementation and use of their

infrastructures for spatial information to report on the implementation of that Directive.

◦ Member States should establish: a list of the spatial data sets and spatial data services

corresponding to the themes listed in Annexes I, II and III to Directive 2007/2/EC

and of the network services grouped by service type


Monitoring is a powerful tool for INSPIRE:◦ To know the status of the implementation A very interesting overview of the situation of geographic

data in our country is obtained.◦ To identify responsible for SDS◦ To identify gaps and overlapping◦ To coordinate the different agents involved◦ To plan the use of the resources◦ To find resources


SDI of Spain

8 Ministries 17 Autonomouscommunities

SDI Local

http://www.idee.es/

To identify the Organizations responsible for the production of official data in each one of the INSPIRE themes


How many spatial data sets are part of the INSPIRE infrastructure?

How many of them have metadata? How many of them have compliant metadata? How many of them are discoverable? How many of them are in conformity with INSPIRE? How many of them can be viewed and downloaded?

Is necessary to have on overview on the status of thedifferent components of the INSPIRE infrastructure at acertain point in time, but also to monitor itsdevelopment through time


“In accordance with article 1 of the Directivethe identification of the data sets shouldhave been based on the requirements ofspatial data for implementation, monitoringassessment and reporting in the variouslegal acts of the environmental acquis.”◦ Extracted from the preliminary documentation for

the bilateral meeting between DG ENV and Spain


Monitoring Indicators

What SDS should be on the list?- One SDS for theme at mayor level and national

coverage?- …there will be 34 SDS- For example:

- Transport Network 1:5.000 of Spain

- One SDS for theme and scale?- For instance, 6 scales: 1:1M, 1:500.000, 1: 250.000, 1:25.000, 1:

10.000 and 1:5.000- …there will be 34 x 6 = 204 SDS


How many SDS should be on the list?- The spatial objects at mayor level and national

coverage:- Administrative units has 6 features for theme:

- Administrative Units: Administrative Boundary, AdministrativeUnit, Condominium

- Maritime Units: Baseline, Maritime Boundary, Maritime Zone- …..There will be 372 features reported



- The option in Spain was all SDS of all themes, allscales, all levels and all organizations?- …It was the method used in the last years monitoring.

2712

5290

4373

3514

1166

1431 1435

2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015

Total SDS/Year

Year Total SDS2009 27122010 52902011 43732012 35142013 11662014 14312015 1435

• 8 national nodes• 17 regional nodes



- This list of SDS were different each year, it depends on therequirements of each year, so SDS of a year aren’t same asSDS another year.

Year Total SDS2009 27122010 52902011 43732012 35142013 11662014 14312015 1435

1. The list of SDS isn’t established, because the requirement has been different each year.

2. Priority SDS missing3. Some Spatial Data Sets regional don’t

cover all territory

4. The detail of SDS aren’t the same



5. Some responsible for SDS didn’t know how to sort their SDS and have troubles doing conformance the SDS

• Street furniture• Jellyfish

watching• Production of

molluscs zones• House Forest

Inventory• Pharmacies

III.5 - Human health and safetyIII.6 - Utility and governmental servicesIII.7 - Environmental monitoringfacilitiesIII.11 - Area management / Restriction / Regulation zones and reporting unitsIII.19 - Species distribution



Monitoring Indicators6. The most of Data sets on the list aren’t

conformant

Year Total SDS % Conformity, DSi22009 2712 0%

2010 5290 1%

2011 4373 2%

2012 3514 1%

2013 1166 1%

2014 1431 1%

2015 1435 1,81%


This situation give a correct idea of the real status of the overall infrastructure.• Spain hadn´t identified their spatial data relevant

to environmental policies • 80% of SDS have metadata and access through

discovery service.• SDS isn’t in conformity with

the implementing rules on data specifications (1.81%)

• Conformity of network services was 16,81%

• the accessibility of spatial data sets was 26,12%


Spain has draw up an Action Plan. ◦ the main concern is the involvement of the environmental community

in the implementation of the INSPIRE Directive the involvement of national representatives and other relevant

stakeholders related to environmental activities.◦ find priority environmental data. Which are the sectors of stakeholders are still missing to contribute

to the implementation of INSPIRE?◦ To report SDS with national cover◦ The conformity of all SDS for annex I will be 100% in November 2017


This Action Plan has also establishes◦ All metadata: 100% compliant by end of 15th may of 2016 accessible through the same discovery services◦ All SDS annex I will be 100% conformity by end of

November 2017◦ At least, one INSPIRE compliant spatial dataset at

national level◦ To remove perceptions that the organizations have the

complexity of INSPIRE implementation

Annex I


Spain has defined the list at the national level, taking into account all thedata custodians that provide data sets or services that can contribute tothe infrastructure of INSPIRE.

0

200

400

600

800

1000

Annex I Annex II Annex III

305 220

910

48 22

209

Number of SDS 2015 2016

279

1435

2016

2015

All SDS for all Annexes

Decrease of SDS


To increase the conformity of metadata and SDS and the accessibility ofSDS

2015 2016Number of SDS for all Annexes 1435 279

% of SDS that has metadata 96% 100%

% of SDS that has conformant metadata 84,4% 100%

Accessibility of spatial data sets through- view services- download services

Total: 29,12%- 1053/1435 (73,37%)- 425/1435 (29,61%)

Total: 62,36%- 260/279 (93,18%)- 188/279 (67,38%)


2015 2016Number of SDS for all Annexes 1435 279

Conformity of SDS for Annex I 18/305 (5,9%) 18/48 (37,5%)

Conformity of SDS for Annex II 3/220 (1,36%) 5/22 (22,72%)

Conformity of SDS for Annex III 5/910 (0,54%) 5/209 (2,39%)

Conformity of SDS for all annexes 26/1435 (1,81%) 28/279 (10,03%)

2015

20160.00%

5.00%

10.00%

15.00%

20.00%

25.00%

30.00%

35.00%

40.00%

Annex IAnnex II

Annex III

20152016


2015 2016Number of services 1279 251

% of Service that have metadata 92,8% 100%

% of Services that have conformantmetadata

73,4% 100%

% of Conformity of network services 16,81% 12,74%


Where are these SDS and services? Official Catalogue of INSPIRE Dataset and Services (CODSI) There are SDS and services according to Action Plan

http://www.idee.es/csw-codsi-idee/srv/spa/catalog.search#/home

INSPIRE official monitoringdashboards: tool to register and evaluatethe level of INSPIRE conformance of a set of INSPIRE services of a country.

Export the XML based on harvested record.

CSW

CSW


The next step Action Plan1. To continue setting the list SD and service Finalize list of priority data set and to help identify

needs to environment SDS Identify SDS with national coverage

2. To meet the deadline of Inspire Directive SDS for annex I: November 2017 SDS for annex II and III: 2020

3. To coordinate the responsible for SDS

The last questions, Is this Action Plan similar to another action plans from others countries?

paloma abad lÓpez, emilio; sÁnchez, alejandra; …...september17 conferenceinspire 2017 9-the...

Documents